![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I've discovered why so many people don't complete RMIT's CCNA training short course by Graham Timmins and Rudy Drew. It's not because the material is particularly difficult for anyone with a modicum of experience (I have received 80% and 72% in the two tests without making any effort) it's because they are, in my very carefully considered opinion, very poor tutors. Indeed, the worst I have ever experienced, and I've reviewed a lot of uni courses.
It all came to a head last Saturday where, after our second test (we still haven't been informed what the assesment actually is), I requested that we receive our marked test papers, for the very obvious methodological advantage of discerning what mistakes a student is making and what interpretations they should place on ambigious questions. This is almost a universal practise among higher education institutions and for very sound pedagogical reasons. The two tutors have refused point blank to allow such review and the only geniune reason provided is the possibility that some of the questions may be repeated in a previously unknown final exam. I can only interpret this as laziness on the part of the tutors who cannot be bothered checking the final exam questions against the assesments previously provided.
Needless to say, if they do not improve their course I will be dropping the subject after the first (accelerated stream) semester. They do not actually offer CCNA certification per se, rather they provide training for the test. Seeming that I already have some three score text books on Cisco routers, I think I don't need these people. Rather, a wealth of locations and test providers is already provided at Pearson Vue. But the experience will at least make a very amusing article for Catalyst. It is also led my brain to consider doing an overview of testing methodology among the so-called professional IT qualifications (e.g., MSCE, CCNA, RHCT,OCP) a comparison with university courses in computer science and recommended standards in pedagogy. Give this one at least a month because I already have a backlog of journal articles that need writing.
Very good news for my first fortnight of webhosting operations. Ten serious expressions of interest, with two substantial institutional contracts confirmed (hosting and dynamically coded sites). Several others have also confirmed that they'll move over to me when their current hosting arrangements expire. This is all good news - and to ensure that this doesn't become a full-time job before I'm prepared for that, I'm attending a NEIS information session this Friday. Once again, if you need webhosting/webpage development, please feel free to email me.
On a related subject I attended an excellent session on the tripwire firewall system yesterday at the Hilton on Park Hotel. Not only does their product seem excellent with strong third party certification, the promotion products (extremely stylish and very sturdy notepads) were a pleasure to receive.
Last Wednesday's Public First meeting at Trades Hall on the Free Trade agreement was quite interesting. Democrat's senator Lyn Allison was replaced by the youthful Senate lead candidate Jessica Healy - this is the second time I've seen her speak and I've been highly impressed both times. Gavin Marshall did a fair job of explaining why the ALP was biding their time on the issue. David Ristrom from the Greens did a fairly good job, but the character who attracted the most attention of course was Alan Moran from the Institute of Public Affairs. Contrary to the suggestions I received from oppositional conservatives, the meeting was not axiomatically against the free trade per se, but rather aspects of this agreement. Alan in fact did not that the intellectual property component was against the principles of free trade.
But where he really fell in a heap however - as the government continues to do so - was regarding the Pharmacetical Benefits Scheme. Alan, like the government, seems to be intent on pushing the fallacy that the PBS will not be affected by the US Free Trade Agreement. This doesn't explain, as Jessica Healy pointed out with some well researched quotes, why the US pharmacetical companies are leaping for joy over the agreement and why institutions such as the National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health are profoundly troubled by the agreement.
Last Sunday's presentation at the Unitarians was Jenny Warfe from the Blue Wedge Coalition discussion the environmental and economic effects of the proposed dredging of Port Phillip Bay to suit the desires of international shipping companies. Her points were quite sound, especially concerning the extremely limited period of time that the public has been given to respond to the proposal, the opposition of senior CSIRO scientists who specialise in the Bay area and the lack of economically viable alternative considerations (e.g., rail to Darwin). This is a major change to the Bay and is gravely disappointing the that Labor government seems to be minimising the public debate on the issue.
This Sunday I'm giving a presentation at the Melbourne Unitarian Church on The Future of the Human Species: Genetic Engineering, Artifical Intelligence, Prosthetics and Simian Uplifting. It's on at 11am at 110 Grey Street, East Melbourne. The presentation will be aired on 3CR (855am) at 10.30 am the following Saturday. Please feel free to come along andheckleprovide insightful questions.
The Flood Inquiry. Collective therapy for those who have been caught lying to the population but need a servile butler to inform them that they didn't actually do anything wrong. Damn those commoners who won't die for King and country anymore. One feels so guilty having to deceive them before sending them to war. Rest assured, you haven't heard the end of this.
It all came to a head last Saturday where, after our second test (we still haven't been informed what the assesment actually is), I requested that we receive our marked test papers, for the very obvious methodological advantage of discerning what mistakes a student is making and what interpretations they should place on ambigious questions. This is almost a universal practise among higher education institutions and for very sound pedagogical reasons. The two tutors have refused point blank to allow such review and the only geniune reason provided is the possibility that some of the questions may be repeated in a previously unknown final exam. I can only interpret this as laziness on the part of the tutors who cannot be bothered checking the final exam questions against the assesments previously provided.
Needless to say, if they do not improve their course I will be dropping the subject after the first (accelerated stream) semester. They do not actually offer CCNA certification per se, rather they provide training for the test. Seeming that I already have some three score text books on Cisco routers, I think I don't need these people. Rather, a wealth of locations and test providers is already provided at Pearson Vue. But the experience will at least make a very amusing article for Catalyst. It is also led my brain to consider doing an overview of testing methodology among the so-called professional IT qualifications (e.g., MSCE, CCNA, RHCT,OCP) a comparison with university courses in computer science and recommended standards in pedagogy. Give this one at least a month because I already have a backlog of journal articles that need writing.
Very good news for my first fortnight of webhosting operations. Ten serious expressions of interest, with two substantial institutional contracts confirmed (hosting and dynamically coded sites). Several others have also confirmed that they'll move over to me when their current hosting arrangements expire. This is all good news - and to ensure that this doesn't become a full-time job before I'm prepared for that, I'm attending a NEIS information session this Friday. Once again, if you need webhosting/webpage development, please feel free to email me.
On a related subject I attended an excellent session on the tripwire firewall system yesterday at the Hilton on Park Hotel. Not only does their product seem excellent with strong third party certification, the promotion products (extremely stylish and very sturdy notepads) were a pleasure to receive.
Last Wednesday's Public First meeting at Trades Hall on the Free Trade agreement was quite interesting. Democrat's senator Lyn Allison was replaced by the youthful Senate lead candidate Jessica Healy - this is the second time I've seen her speak and I've been highly impressed both times. Gavin Marshall did a fair job of explaining why the ALP was biding their time on the issue. David Ristrom from the Greens did a fairly good job, but the character who attracted the most attention of course was Alan Moran from the Institute of Public Affairs. Contrary to the suggestions I received from oppositional conservatives, the meeting was not axiomatically against the free trade per se, but rather aspects of this agreement. Alan in fact did not that the intellectual property component was against the principles of free trade.
But where he really fell in a heap however - as the government continues to do so - was regarding the Pharmacetical Benefits Scheme. Alan, like the government, seems to be intent on pushing the fallacy that the PBS will not be affected by the US Free Trade Agreement. This doesn't explain, as Jessica Healy pointed out with some well researched quotes, why the US pharmacetical companies are leaping for joy over the agreement and why institutions such as the National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health are profoundly troubled by the agreement.
Last Sunday's presentation at the Unitarians was Jenny Warfe from the Blue Wedge Coalition discussion the environmental and economic effects of the proposed dredging of Port Phillip Bay to suit the desires of international shipping companies. Her points were quite sound, especially concerning the extremely limited period of time that the public has been given to respond to the proposal, the opposition of senior CSIRO scientists who specialise in the Bay area and the lack of economically viable alternative considerations (e.g., rail to Darwin). This is a major change to the Bay and is gravely disappointing the that Labor government seems to be minimising the public debate on the issue.
This Sunday I'm giving a presentation at the Melbourne Unitarian Church on The Future of the Human Species: Genetic Engineering, Artifical Intelligence, Prosthetics and Simian Uplifting. It's on at 11am at 110 Grey Street, East Melbourne. The presentation will be aired on 3CR (855am) at 10.30 am the following Saturday. Please feel free to come along and
The Flood Inquiry. Collective therapy for those who have been caught lying to the population but need a servile butler to inform them that they didn't actually do anything wrong. Damn those commoners who won't die for King and country anymore. One feels so guilty having to deceive them before sending them to war. Rest assured, you haven't heard the end of this.